In light of the 911 tragedies, I find your depiction of a plane landing in the water very disturbing and tasteless. The world doesn't need to be reminded of such cruel acts again. Think before you shoot!
I doubt this was taken with the built-in flash. When you place a "thick photo paper" in front of the flash, there will be some light fall off on the wall. The light from the flash will also shine through the paper. I've tried it with a glass plate that is heavier than paper and is glossy white. The light had cast a huge shadow on the wall where the plate was blocking the light. At the top edge of the picture frame there should also be flash where it bounced down from the ceiling.
645D: I have been a Canon user for over 20 years, my first film SLR is Canon, my first DSLR is Canon, and my current gear is Canon, with over a dozen Canon glasses. I have followed DPR for many years, always believe DPR has the best unbiased reviews, until this 5D3. DPR, your explanation of the scoring just not hold. I can understand the trade of FPS Speed vs MP, and I can overlook the $500 price difference. But you call 5D3 more featured than D800 just not hold. What about the build-in flash, which also commands slave? what about multi-format accepting DX lenses? The face-recognition AF, the superior metering from D4, and USB3? All these that 5D3 lacks, and with bad JPG.I am not a C nor N fanboy, I am not worried about the scoring, which is just a number, and does not affect my purchase decision. I am putting this because DPR lost my long time trust, and lost the high standard of unbiased journalism that I used to respect DPR with.DPR, it's time to explain the scoring with evidence?
According to DPR, video is given less weighting which really doesn't affect the score as much. I think its time DPR should put more emphasis on video since both DSLRs are more than capable tools for videographers.
Agreed, I didn't write the review ;) The 5D3 does offer features that a photographer might look for or want such as blending with up to 9 exposures, HTP that will help extend the dynamic range by reducing blown out highlights, and advanced HDR mode for many that are interested in this feature.
Let's look at the score shall we...
The 5D3 just edges out the D800 in features and it also outperforms the D800 in the speed category (which by the way is given less weighting). The D800 on the other hand, edges out the 5D3 in RAW, JPEG, and to a lesser extent in the high ISO performance category. These categories alone carry the most weight.
The other categories such as handling, metering & focus accuracy, and the build quality scores are tied between the two. No surprises here.
Overall, it looks like the D800 is the clear winner based on the scoring. However, the 5D3 makes up for it with its speed and features to match. It's a toss up folks, do we call it a draw?
Bear this in mind... the D4 took a stomping, chewing, slobbering by a 500lb grizzly and it still shoots beautifully. I don't think any camera can handle this type of abuse!
Glad the photographer made it out in one piece. Can't say the same for his equipment though.
Reality Check: @ numerous posts
Not bashing or soliciting a debate, the D800 is a great camera for Nikon to have in its stable, but it is not 'revolutionary' to the industry other than megapixel count - and the correct term in that regard is 'inevitable'.
As for the performance of the D800, any camera with a high megapixel count presents an opportunity to bin the output and increase the perceived noise levels and dynamic range performance. The 'advantage' the D800 provides is a ~78% binning as used by DxO (8mp image = 8x12 @ 300dpi) to achieve its 'record breaking' score - simply a higher compression than other sensors currently provide, not superiority of the sensor. Comparisons at the same compression ratio are not performed (24mp = ~5mp image, 22mp = ~4.5mp image, 12mp = ~3mp image, etc).
As for the sensor itself (per pixel level performance) there are several other cameras that have better performance results. Against its direct competitor, aside from pixel count, Nikon simply played catch up.
..aside from pixel count, here are the other reasons as voted by the general public (in no particular order).
-highest MP FF camera.-affordable camera for the amateur photographer.-supports the latest PC interface UHS-I, USB 3.0-high sensitivity (DR) and low noise.-comparable to medium format camera.-overwhelming image quality.-slow frame rate is like shooting with film, works on one picture carefully at a time.
Congrats to Nikon!
PhillyFotog: A lot is being made of the bayer demosaicing process being inherently damaging to absolute resolution. I wonder, can the raw image processors be set to not do any demosaic prior to desaturation in order to obtain B&W from a color imager? If so, would this not negate the resolution advantage of a monochrmomatic imager in terms of resolution? Of course, sensitivity to light will always be hindered by a bayer filter, so the monochrome imager will be at an advantage in terms of S:N. But strictly in terms of resolution, would a modified raw converter be enough to level the field?
A color sensor derives its luminance from the green channel only, hence the resolution will be lower. Changing the RAW converter as you said will not increase the resolution unless all the pixels were used for luminance.
Picturenaut: @ DP review: thank you very much again for a great & thorough review. Now I can't await your detailed EOS 5D3 review. Looking at the samples here I'd expect it coming soon.
One thing is clear: Nikon made a huge leap in FF technology, what impresses me most is that the D800 obviously beats noise performance of a mid format Pentax 645D without substantial loss of detail! This will drive the competition forward, and I think we customers will finally all profit from that massive impact, regardless of which 35 mm FF system we are using, Nikon or Canon or Sony.
and not just still images, Nikon has slightly raised the bar on its video recording as well. It may not be ready for Hollywood yet but it's good enough for those short clips and probably music videos too. Amazingly versatile camera!
fastprime: Regarding this conclusion:
" We emphasize the word can, because if you're truly after 36MP performance, be prepared to do some work. Flawless technique, fast shutter speeds and top-shelf equipment (particularly lenses and a tripod) along with a low ISO are requirements not options."
I really don't get this. The pixel density is slightly less than the APS-C D7000. On the D800 the DX area of the sensor is 15mp, therefore the additional 21mp are in the sensor area between the DX area and the perimeter.
All cameras benefit from flawless technique, tripods and better lenses. Nobody talks about flawless technique, tripods and top shelf lenses being requirements to shoot a D7000 (or the 24mp D3200, 22mp 5D3 or any other brand high density mpxl camera). Why should the D800 be singled out?
Flawless techniques is not just about expensive lenses and a tripod. You should also use MUP and a tripod for sharper images. Check your focus for accuracy by using LiveView and magnify your subject up close. A fast SD or CF card is essential for recording movies and writing large RAW files. This camera will show your flaws much more than a lesser one.
The closest thing to a Leica I have ever owned is my Panasonic Lumix ZS3. By setting the the maximum ISO to 800 and using intelligent auto exposure mode (iA), the images are gorgeous with more detail than my Nikon.
The point here is that low ISO performance is sometimes more important than high ISO performance. That is priceless. With that in mind, I rather get the D800E and save my pocket change for better glass. IMHO.
Nice pics! After owning a D3100 awhile back before I sold mine, the low light images are much improved, thanks to Expeed3 and the new 24MP sensor (from Sony of course).
Now, if Nikon can include these features, it would be a sweeter deal, IMHO.
-more than one custom white balance.-Kelvin temperature scale.-shoot with flash while dragging the shutter.-Off, Low, or High NR at ISO 800 and above.